Jump to content

IONEPUTT

Member
  • Posts

    62
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About IONEPUTT

  • Birthday 04/15/1947

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Colorado
  • Interests
    Competitive shooting, Golf, gardening. wood working
  • Handicap:
    6
  • Referred By:
    Saw your posts and looked you up

Recent Profile Visitors

392 profile views

IONEPUTT's Achievements

40

Reputation

  1. I've done a few demo sessions with the new irons, and the only real difference I see is that the new irons have a lot less Loft then the older clubs with the same number stamped on the head. AS an example, the TM Burner 2.0 6 iron has 5 degrees less loft than my 18 year old forged irons and the ball goes about 20 yards farther with the new Burner than my older 6 iron. Bottom line the Burner 6 iron is more like a strong 5 iron of 15 years ago. Me, I'd much rather have my older set and just hit a 5 iron if I need another 15-20 yards of carry. Same thing for the new drivers. I'll keep my old 2005 Launcher Comp and let the rest of you have the newer driver with the adjustable hosel garbage.
  2. As some others have mentioned, not everyone has the swing speed to hit a 3W any further than they can a 5W. One way to go would be to get a HIGH launch shaft put into all you woods, I did this a long time ago and have not looked back. Grafalloy used to make the Pro Launch Blue FW shaft that was great in all woods. Then they came out with the Epc FW which was even better. I have those two shafts in 4 woods in my bag now. While those shafts are not made today, you can still find them if you look for USED woods on E-bay to look more for the shaft than the head it's in. But you need to know that the old Pro Launch Blue Driver shaft is NOT the same as the FW shaft used in woods. I have a 15* 3W, a 18* 5W, a 21* 7 W and a 24* 9W in my bag now. All are easy to hit and give me the yardages I need in my bag. Off the tee my 5W gives me 255 yards total on average, and the others are at 15 yards increments for Carry yardage . Just what I like in all my clubs. You might also look at a wood with a carbon crown, as those heads give you a higher launch angle compared to an all metal head design. The old Cleveland Launcher Comp fairway woods are well worth a look and test at the range. With many golfers having trouble hitting fairway metals these day, I have no idea why the after market shaft companies don't make a decent shaft designed just for woods. If they did a lot more golfers would not be having so much trouble hitting the fairway woods. D-Star asked to tips on hitting a 3 W, so here are mine. Off the tee, use a ball position that is the same as you use for your driver. In my case, that means up by my left heal, and tee it high enough to hit up on the ball, but NOT too high, as that would mean a different swing than when hitting off the deck. When hitting off the deck position the ball back about 3-5 inches so you can swing close to LEVEL to the ball and NOT up at it, being as the ball is on the ground, kind of hard to swing up at it without hitting the ground well behind the ball which is NOT good at all. And PRACTICE both shots at the range until you get a feel for them and can hit them well enough that you have some confidence in hitting both shots when you need to. I hope this helps a litter. Good luck with your woods next time out.
  3. Unless you have a meter to measure the speed of the green you use, me telling you the speed of the green I used for the test would be useless, and in fact I did NOT measure the speed of the green as my Stimp meter was at home at the time and hot available to use. Just hit a few balls until you find a stroke that hits the ball 20-25 feet and try the test. When I first learned of this test there was NO green speed rating so I have no idea what the speed of the green was when the test was created, so just go for it and see what happens.
  4. I could make a video but I will NOT waste my time doing that. I have done the putt the ball over the cup test, and my High CG putter passed and a few OEM putters I did the same test with did NOT pass. As I stated before, I had a dozen of so PGA golf instructors hit my putter and they ALL said my putter rolled the ball better then what they were using. So I did my testing and am happy with the results. I have all the proof I need, and I have no need to prove it again to anyone. Either accept my test results or you don't. Or YOU could modify your putter to be a high CG putter and do your own testing. I hope that D-Star will look at what I posted and build a new putter with a HG and learn from my testing. If not that is his choose.
  5. My High CG putter is built with 4* of loft, so the ball can come up and out of the slight depression it was sitting in on the green. That's the same loft as my Odyssey putter and yet my putter got the ball rolling a lot sooner than the Odyssey putter did. Same loft but rolling sooner, which is what my design was built to do. And IF the ball doesn't go too far up off the putter face, it can start to roll as soon as if touches down and there is NO skid, which is what I was trying to get rid of, and it worked out fine.
  6. I'm sure glad I do NOT have to deal with what you are doing on the green. Sounds like you have to THINK too much as to what stroke to use for every putt. I just use ONE putting stroke for ALL putts no matter how long or short it is. I just take the putter head back more for a longer putt and a shorter one for a short putt. Before every round I play, I just spend a few minutes on the practice green to figure out how fast the greens are and adjust my stroke length to match the green speed. Pretty simple without have to thing about what stroke I need for every putt. I don't care if it's an up hill or a down hill putt, don't care if it's 2 feet or 100 feet, same putting stroke just with a different stroke length to suit the distance to the cup. Can't get much simpler than that, and simple is easier to do consistantly.
  7. One good reason NOT to use hardened tool steel, is that even un-hardeded tool steel is HARD to machine, and that would just increase the cost to build the putter. And tool steel costs MORE than free machining stainless steel does. Plus there is NO good reason to use tool steel as stainless steel is plenty hard enough to last for decades of use no matter how much a golfer might practice or play. Total waste of both time and money to use tool steel. I hope this answers you question?
  8. Hi Cnosil; I'm glad you appreciate what I built. There IS a way to TEST how soon the ball starts to roll with a putter, and IF the ball is being launched up into the air as it comes off the putter face. I learned about this test shortly after I built my first high CG putter and tried it. What you do is hit a few balls to get the feel of HOW hard you have to hit the ball to get it to go 20-25 feet on level ground. Then set up with a ball about 12 inches from the cup, and hit the ball AT the cup. Right over the center of the cup. IF the ball goes right over the cup with NO problem, the ball was UP in the air as it went over the cup. NOT what you want to have happen. IF the ball was on the grass and rolling when it got to the front edge of the cup, the ball would nave started to go DOWN into the cup due to gravity. And when the ball got to the far side of the cup, it would have been part way down into the cup and the ball would have then HIT the back edge of the cup and it would have then Bounces UP a bit from hitting the cup. I tried this little test with my Odyssey putter and my custom built putter and it was quire an eye opener. With my Odyssey putter the ball DID NOT hit the far edge of the cup, and it FLEW right over the cup with no problem. But when I hit a ball with my High CG putter the ball DID hit the back lip of the cup and it bounced off the lip and UP into the air. proof that the ball had started to go down into the cup due to it rolling on the ground and NOT being up in the air. This is a simple test YOU can do at your local putting green to see just how much AIR TIME your golf ball is getting coming of the face of your putter. A very simple and easy test anyone can do on the course that does not require any fanny equipment. Try it with your putter and see what happens. As for WHY none of the major OEM's don't make a high CG putter, just look at all of the putters in the photos above of Artisan putters. Every one of them has a low lip on the back edge of the putter. And most EVERY golf I've every been paired with on the course uses this LIP to pick up their ball with OUT a need to BEND over. Would it be fair to say the most all golfers are TOO LAZY to bend over and pick up their ball, they would rather have a putter with this stupid lip at the back to pick up the ball instead. I doubt that many of todays golfers would but a putter if it did NOT have this stupid little lip, as that would mean they would then have to bend over and that would not be cool. While this is ONLY my opinion of why some OEM's would not build a putter with a high CG, but can you explain one other good reason for this stupid on every putter being sold today? I sure can't think of a good reason, can YOU?
  9. When I built my putter someone told me it may not be conforming so I looked it up at that time, about 15 years ago. What I found then was that there could be a part of the putter head above the face as long as it for for weight distrubution, Not sure of the exact wording, as it's been awhile. As you know there have been a lot of small changes to the rule book over the last 20 years, and the part I found may have been changed. I have no idea if that is the case or not. Just going by what I found back then about it being legal to have a piece of the club above the putter face if it was done to effect the weight balance of the club, and that is what my design does. On page 52 it shows that the putter face may be up to 2.5" tall. My putter face is right at 1.0" tall, and the total height of the putter head is 2.250" high. So it would not be a problem to change the face height of my design to reach up to the top of the two pods. Would surely change the look of the head, but it could be easily done to match what the rule books shows it must be according to todays rules. The main reason I posted my design photo was to show a way a high CG putter could be built. And the reason I built my putter was to see IF a high CG putter would in fact roll the ball better than the putters on the market at the time. And when I tested my putter using about a dozen PGA instructors as testers, They all said my putter rolled the ball better than their putter. Most of those instructors had either a Scotty Cameron or an Odyssey putter in their bag. And both of those top rated putters have a LOW CG design. And nothing has changed with those brands to this day, they still have a low CG design. As I said in another post, I do NOT play in tour events and have no desire to re-design my putter to make everyone happy with the design meeting the USGA rules. If someone else wants to take my design and make a few changes to meet the rule book requirements, they are free to do so. I'm just not interested it doing so at this time in my life.
  10. Here's a better view of my putter design. In this photo it's clear that the two pods are NOT in front of the face of the putter. Sorry for the other photo not showing this more clearly. In this photo the camera is in line with the shaft, and therefore slightly behind the front face of the putter.
  11. It does NOT matter what anyone else says about the length of each part of your stroke. The ONLY thing that matter to YOU is what Works best for YOU. MY advice is simple. Try a few putts and SEE what works for you, and you have YOUR answer, Nothing else matters, or at least it should NOT matter to you. What works for ME is all I care about, and that's all that should matter to you as well.
  12. The front of each pod is at the Center of the light colored piece of wood at the front of the putter face, so it is NOT in front of the putter face. So that is not an issue with the rules. As for the pods being above the putter face, the rules allow for this IF the purpose of the piece above the putter face is "for the purpose of Balance". And that is exactly the reason for the pods being above the face of the putter. So that is also not an issue. And if it was considered to be a legal issue, all I would have to do is attach another piece of wood to the face of the putter that would go up to the height of the pods, and that would solve the issue if the USGA were to say my design was not legal as is. To be "HONEST" with you , I did NOT look at the rules when I designed my putter, or I would have made a few changes to my design to avoid any issues as you noted. I also do NOT play in any tourniments, so for my personal use I don't really care if the USGA has a problem with my design. If I were to play in a club event, I would make any changes to my design as needed to conform to the rules as needed. As I mentioned in another post, the design "Works" extremely well. I have had about a dozen PGA instructors hit balls with my putter, and every one of them said my putter rolled the ball "better" than the putter they had in their bag. So the design works as I intended it to, so IF I would need to change a few things to get it to conform to the rules, that would be easy enough, and not really an issue.
  13. For those of you that are not familiar with the system of measurement, there are 7000 grains to a pound, so it's a much more precise system to use to measure small amounts of weight. The wooden pods are attached to the body of the putter with a small piece of tubing, and each tube has 30 grains of lead in them to go with the 60 grains in each pod. This weight is WAY above the CG of the ball, and that causes the ball to roll sooner which helps to keep the ball on line when you putt.
  14. In a previous reply to your post on building your own putter, I mentioned that your work looks great, and I suggested that you try a putter design with a High CG to get the ball rolling as soon as possible for better performance on the greens. Here are a few photos of the putter I designed and built about 15 years ago with a High CG. The two pods above the face of the putter have 60 grains of lead in each pod. The putter is made of Pakka wood, which is very hard and stands up very well to a lot of use. Putter head weighs 360 grams or so. There are five pieces of lead in the main body of the putter also. Very easy to align the face of the putter to the ball using the light colored inserts in the top surface of the head. The design rolls the ball extremely well, Better than any name brand putter I've tried over the years.
  15. Again , this is beautiful workmanship on your part. Nicely done. What I would like to suggest is that next time you machine a putter head. INVERT the head so that "Flange" on the bottom of the head at the back, is ON TOO. That simple change would "Raise" the CG to be above the ball at impact and that would cause the ball to "Roll" sooner and not pop up into the air as much coming off the putter face. WEDGES are designed to get the ball UP into the air. and ALL good wedges have a LOW CG for that reason. If you use that same thinking to build a putter, the ball "Will" pop up into the air, just like with a wedge. Reverse the design to a HIGH CG design and I think you'll like the results a lot.
×
×
  • Create New...